Download - An Agile Approach for Converting Enterprise Architectures

7/23/2019 An Agile Approach for Converting Enterprise Architectures

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/an-agile-approach-for-converting-enterprise-architectures 1/7

An Agile Approach for Convering Enterise

Architectures

.. 1 .. 2 .Okke� Emin BAL<I<EK ,Mcahit GUDEBAHR ,Sinan <EKEEKLIInformation Tecnologies ,,3

Kuveyt Trk Participation Bak ,,3

Istanbul, Turkey ,,3

eminbalcicek@kuveytturkcomtr mucahitgundebahar@kuveytturkcomtr

sinancekerekli@kuveytturkcomtr 3

bstract- Enterprise Architecture includes IT

infrastructures, business processes and whole computer

applications in an enterprise. Since such enterprise architecture

is the backbone of corporates operating model and business

processes, enterprise architecture conversions are very strategic

projects. The general tendency for enterprise architecture

conversion is big bang approach that is hard to be supported byexecutives as the results are very late for new architecture to

prove. Because of complexity and trade-off between costs and

risk, this paper suggests simple solution that starts the project

with small core team. First task will be developing coexistence

methodology between two systems in data level. By this solution

the whole system is able to redesign smaller business projects step

by step. It continues developing a prototype on simple business

scenario that contains most common behavior of all enterprise

architecture. The prototype's aim is to prove new design. The key

success factor of this model is agility while managing divided

projects and good management skill of the core team while

developing new core business processes and system architecture.

Keywords-agile; enterprise architecture; corebankingconversion; project management;

NTRODCTION

Responding to economic, suctural as well as the radicalchanges of business enviroent and tecnological shis,companies needs to change their business processes, computersoware applications and IT inasuctures periodically. Ifcoorates need big transfoation on paricular core itemssuch as people, process, coorate culture or tecnology, they

need a methodology to accomplish this conversion.

The general tendency for enterise architecte conversion(EAC) is aditional "bigbang approach which is a comonly

used tecnique for corporates to meet this demand. Thecoorates start huge project for these conversions This kind of

projects need ver crowded and complex project team and theyconsist of analyzing all systems and business processes,

redesigning them, matching with new tecnologies, and lastlydeveloping new inastrcture with business requrements. At

the end of the conversion, corporates have to shut down oldsystem and start up new one at the same time. It also includes

high scale of project implementation and adoption risks. That is why, big bang approach contains high rate of failure risk. As itis a ver comprehensive asition, there might be system

ISBN: 978-1-4673-5613-8©013 IEEE

failure that affects business processes, service qualit and sales. All these anticipated problems make executives reluctant tosupport these projects since the results are ver late for newarchitecture to prove.

Due to the problems and diculties mentioned above, this

study suggests "an agile approach as a solution. Executives, board and other depatments as customers will have high levelof satisfaction because of the customer oriented nate of agileapproach rather than system approach. Another benet of agileapproach is that implementation of new system architecture isquite easier, compared to other approaches. What is more, asagile approach starts with proof of concept projects and progresses with small divided projects thaks to thecoexistence methodolog, it ncludes zero rate of failure riskcompaed to other rival approaches. The balance between

tecnology and business is the conibution of this approach to the system.

The rest of paper organize as follows, section 2 gives detail

infoation about the Enterprise Architecture ConversionProjects. Section 3 details our contribution and solution forexecuting huge Enterise Architecte conversion projects.Section 4 shows experimental results of o approachimplementation in a bak which has 300 branches in Tkey.

II.ENTEPISE ARCHITECTUE CONVERSIONPROJECTS

A. The Concept Of Enterprise Architecture

he IEEE Standard for Architectural Description ofSowareIntensive Systems (IEEE P1471/D.3) denesarchitecture as: "the ndamental organization of a system,

embodied in its components, their relationships to each otherand the enviroment, and the principles goveing its designand evolution.

Peter [1] denes enterise achitecte (EA) as theorganizing logic for busness processes and IT inasuctre

reecting the integration and standardization requirements of the companys operating model. According to him, theoperating model is a design which aims at having an ideal stateof business process integration and busness processstandardization to deliver goods and services to the customers.MIT, on the other hand, considers enterise achitecte as a

380



critical tool for uniing IT and business sategy and as adriving business value om IT.

In this paper, the operational denition of enterprisearchitecture is a concept which establishes the cooratesintegrated business processes and infoation tecnologies toachieve a coorates' mission trough optimal performance ofits core business processes within an ecient infoation

tecnology (IT) enviroment.

B. EA Conversion Projects

Companies face the challenge of business processes and ITinasuctures change due to the driving forces ofglobalization, tecnology explosion, and rapid growth onorganizational sucte. As a result, they increasingly need toconsider and psue ndamental change - nsformation - to maintain or gain competitive advantage [2]. Implementing and managing ndamental change for companies is paricularlychallenging due to a number of nstitutional factors, huge andcomplex business processes, bureaucratic procedures,

hierarchical sctes and established organizational culture[2]. Consequently, companies have to star enterise

architecture conversion (EAC) projects to implement thesendamental changes.

C Conversion Methodologies

There ae four main conversion methodologies that thecompanies resort to realize ndamental system changes [3][4]. They are named as direct cutover conversion (known as

the big bang conversion), parallel conversion, phasedconversion and pilot conversion. These conversion

metodooges many der om eac oter n te way tat they realize the implementation. In the following sections, big bang conversion and parallel conversion are compared. Therst one is the most widely used method by companies while

converting EA and the second one constitutes the rationale behind suggested approach: agile approach.

1) Big Bang ConversionThe general tendency for EAC is the traditional "bigbang

approach which depends on big bang conversion method. It isa commonly used tecnique for coorates to satis EACdemands. According to Eason [5] big bang is the adoption tpeof the instant changeover as the entre organization stops usng

the old system and starts using the lly nctioning newsystem at the same time. That is why, this method is also called"direct cutover conversion. Everbody starts to use the newsystem at the same date and the old system will not be usedanymore om that moment on.

The conversion needs ver crowded and complex project team and it consists of analyzing all system and business processes, redesigning them, matching with new tecnologies,and developing new inastructure with business requrements[6].

The tendency for coorates to use big bang conversion asEAC stems om two main reasons. Frst reason is that onedoesn't have to suggle with the difculties and illsucturedof legacy system. To implement best design to new enterisearchitecture independently without taking the old system into

ISBN: 978-1-4673-5613-8©013 IEEE

consideration. Second reason is that there is no risk to thelegacy system during EAC. The fact that aining of the staff isonly needed for the new method not also for the changeover

period and the cleaess of the changeover date for everonefavors big bang conversion for coorates.

Nevertheless, big bang conversion is treated as the riskiest method in the literature [4] [6]. First of all, fall back'plans are hard to develop and become more impossible when the big bang has taken place. There can also a need for catch up period(initial dip phenomenon) to deal with particula problems anddifculties. Furtheore, it is also hard to be supported byexecutives as the results ae ver late for new architecte to prove. It includes high scale of project implementation andadaptation risks. It is hard to become familiar with new systemfor the end users soon. As it is a ver comprehensive ansition,

there might be system failure that affects business processes,service qualit and sales.

2) Parallel ConversionTo minimize conversion risks met during the transitions,

parallel conversion is an alteative method for transfeing

between previous systems to target system in an organization.With coexistence methodology in data level, two systems can be run simultaneously for some period of time. hen the requirements for the new system are met, the old system isshut down [4]. Although the process requires careful planingand control as well as a signicant investment in labor hours,it is favored as it minimizes risk compared to the otherconversion methodologies. Lee [6] also states his preferencefor parallel conversion as follows: "When the organizationdemands heavily on the old (legacy) system to be changed, the

tradeoff between extra involved costs for a less risky parallelapproach, should be in favor of those extra costs.

IIAN AGILE APPROACH FOR ENTEPISE ARCHITECTUE CONVERSIONS

This study suggests simple, agile, business oriented and riskee solution for enterise architecte conversions projects. CIO.com cites a Dynamic Markets survey of 800 IT managers, reporting that 62 percent of IT projects fail to meet their schedules and 25 percent of IT projects get canceled before completion [7].

The success of conversion project relies on the right balance of business and tecnology. According to Juan Porer[8] successl change management requres equal attention to

these four components: process, tecnology, people andcoorate culte.

Agile approach depends on parallel conversion method andit not only focus on tecnology and tecniques but also people.So, the approach should be business oriented tecnology whiledeveloping our new system. Agile approach works iterativelyand incrementally and targets at the whole picture whileexecuting conversion projects. It is a customerorientedapproach as it makes EA atctive for them. It includes highlevel of human interaction instead of virtual communicationduring the project to generate signicant performance. Ever

business process and system artifact design in agile approach must also be as simple as possible. Porer [8] states that

381



conversion manager should ensure that all stakeholders om the top executives to end users are equipped to maximizecompanies' new solution. The motto of the approach is: statedin Ambler [9] as "Thik at enterise level but act locally.

We can deduce om the above discussion, in agileapproach, EAC should stat with small core team. First task

will be developing coexistence methodology between tosystems to gain parallel adoption. By this way two systems isable to live in coexistence and the whole system is able to

redesign smaller business projects step by step. Withdeveloping coexistence system in the data level system can run paallel and projects can be agile now. Federated authorizeddepartment should be created for managing all conversion

projects. This deparment should include two tpes of team.One of them is core team which has determined numbers ofexperts and another one is conversion team which can beincreased or decreased according to scale of the ongong projects. Finished steps affects the other small projects in good way.

Defne Cuent EA

Defne Taget

E

Ceate Conversin Raap Poject Plan

Make EA Poject Estima

ion

Sta

E

Convesion Pject

C

a Fdaed

E

Dp

Frm re T eam

Defne Pototye of Core Module

pleent d Prve hu

g

Pttpe

Poduce d Run Coe Module

Run e Mdule wih ld Syste Siulaneously

b oexistence Mehodolo

Divide

E

Poject into all Managable

Aile Po

j

ects

Fom Convesion T eam F or Each Po

ect

pleent Each Sall Poject

Adopt Smal Pojects wih Palel Convesio

Fiish

E

Cvesi Pject

Fig. 1. Chronological order for EAC projects

ISBN: 978-1-4673-5613-8©013 IEEE

The schema above can be dened as the project management steps in a c onological order for accomplishngEAC projects which are huge, complicated and risk within theagile point of view. The ow like nate of the schema reveals

the ease of agile approach in any conversion projects. As can be seen, the agile approach stats with proof of concept projectsand progress with small divided projects thaks to thecoexistence methodology. Compared to other rival approaches,

there is a great emphasis on customer satisfaction due to itscustomer oriented nature which can be easily seen in the relevant steps. Overall, this system is also preferable due to itsconibution to the balance between tecnology and businessand the choice of paper title "An Agile Approach forConverting Enterise Architectures is based on this logic.

A. Roadmap for EAC

Roadmap is a plan of master project to suarize thecompany's current situation and it contains chosen tecnology, project management approach, and new architecture design andimplementation steps. t also contains new business and new

tecnology architecture. It is executed as small IT projects to

implement the whole scope. A manager should choose one of the most common EAF as

a tool to simpli conversion project. EAC needs cuent business and tecnology diagram and goal diagram to dene roadmap. Managers should draw current EAF and target EAF before begining conversion projects. EAF also providesorganizations with the abilit to understand and analyze

weaknesses or inconsistencies to be identied and addressed. As a result, EAF help company to see big picture whiledening roadmap for EAC.

While developing the roadmap, the manager should bring the core business and tecnology implementation forward and prioritize it in rst and most important small project. It is a

proof of concept project. This paper offers the following roadmap for EAC;

• Dening Current Architecture

• Determining EAC Goals

• Choosing Tecnology

• Implementing Coexistence Model

• Using Agile Approach

• New Architecture Design

Business Processes Design

System Architecture Design

Prototping and Proving

User Interface Design

B. EACGoals

EAC goals may differ accordng to company's current EAsituation. As a result, a company's current tecnology and business inasucture should be well deed. As enterpriselevel companies mostly have complex and high uncertainenviroment. That means, the rules and behaviors of theorganization determines the target EA which in tu determinesEAC goals. Because of the company's vision for 5 years, target projection must be considered while determining EAC goals.

38



Manager should mind the numbers of target customers, targetservice/production process and taget service point. One more

point that needs to be considered for deteining EAC's goal is the company's target service type that may be 7/24 or in business hours. Target service tpe affects new architecteintensely.

Aer stating the company's based goals, the common best practice specications of EA should be added to the goals.Suggested specications are as follows:

• Well deed and standardized business processes as negotiated

• Central system structure includes soware and hardware

• Highperformance communication technology between application layers

• Powerl information engine which can use eithersystem alers and business alerts

• Smooth and fast application deployment

• Data integrity om database to user interface level

• Enough level security not anymore.

• Open to new technology adaptation

• Ability to other application integration easily

• Inteational standardization

• High availability and sustainability

• Usability and high satisfaction on User Interfaces

• Customer oriented approach on every EA process

• Agile soware development life cycle (SDLC)

Project Management

1) Project Management Approach

While managing EAC projects, companies need a management approach to accomplish project successlly.There are two known approaches while managing projects; oneof them is traditional approach the other one is agile project

management approach. Traditional approach is published byProject Management Institute (PMI) underlying the PMBOK(Project Management Body of nowledge) in 2009 [10]. Thesecond one uses agile practices om Agile Manifesto [11].

While planing all EAC project as a program, traditional project management, which is dened by PMI, is used.However, in divided projects of EAC which are small building

blocks of the whole program management, agile project management is used. Accordng to Daniel and Jon Feandez

[12] this tpe of management is called as "Hybrid Approach. Although our suggested solution use two project managementapproach and it seems as hybrid, agile project management isdominating all conversion projects because of the divided

nature of the projects.

Aer determining project approach, establishing roadmapand generating project plan, companies need to make

projection estimation in order to determine resource, time and budget for EAC.

ISBN: 978-1-4673-5613-8©013 IEEE

2) Project Estimation Technique According PMI (2008), there are 5 tpes of project

estimating tecniques which are: analogous estimating (Topdown), bottomup estimating, parametric estimating, t ee

points estimating and whatif aalysis.

In this approach, a manager should mix topdown, bottom up estimation tecniques to obtain the best estimation. Not only topdown but also bottomup estimation should be consideredabout time and budget in projection. Topdown estimationshould be done rst. Validit of topdown duration estimatesdepends on historical information, similait of the historical

projects and expert judgment. Aer that, to do bottomupestimation, ever single project should be inspected in detail.

All tasks identied in work break down structure andestimation should be done. Duration time should be calculatedin personday unit to understand clear and simple employeeallocation. Aer determining personday of all projects, budgetcan be calculated. This result should be compared with topdown estimation. Topdown and bottomup estimation should

be approximate to gain good estimation. While estimating each task, analogous estimating method should be used by using

expert judgment. Aer this step, project plan may be updated. A manager of EAC project has to prove this project

estimation to the board for project approval. Cross check tmeand budget projection with trusted advisor company is acogent evidence for approving EAC projection.

D) Organization Model During ConversionIn agile approach, human management is more signicant

than business and tecnology development. In this section, how to achieve this management issue successlly is discussed.

1) Creating Federated Department As EAC inuences ever department in organization, all

depatment tend to be in project implementation. All

departments at issue want to be in decision process. In tu, there are too many heads and competing departments which make the process slow down. It cause to chaos and lead inlosing conol. In order to execute, conversion ProjectCompany needs to create lly authorized federateddepartment. Due to the enterise architecture notion, the nameof the depatment should be Enterise ArchitecteDeparment (EAD). This department should be under the headof Information Tecnology.

2) Matrix StructureEAC project comprises of small IT projects. IT projects

need different roles of people such as business domain expert,soware architect, soware developer, system analyst, project

manager, test engineer, deployment expert. It is hard toconsolidate these roles in just one department

It is imporant to position key employees for project:soware architect, soware developer, system analyst and testengineer in the EA deparment to maximize eciency and gain rapid ouut ding project implementation. They shouldchange ther position to the EA deparment if it is possible. Foranother resources especially business domain experts, companyshould choose song matrix organization structure to manage

human resources in EAC projects.

383



E) Human Resource Management During ConversionDespite the fact that EAC projects are business oriented, IT

task items are more than business task items. IT projects are knowledge base projects and they are highly depended on personal knowledge and skills.

Employment of conversion project team is a ver criticalissue and this team should be recruited by tecnical person whois independent of human resource department. Anotherimportant issue is training these people. Management of this

team is core competence for the process of agile approach.

Two tpes of organization group are offered. One of themis core team which has determined numbers of experts andanother one is conversion team which can be increased ordecreased according to scale of the ongoing projects. The keysuccess factor of this model is agilit while managing divided

projects and good management skill the core team whiledeveloping new core business processes and systemarchitecture. Core team has to include Enterise Architects,

who are minimum 2 business domain experts with minimum 7 years' experience and high level skills on soware architectedesign and implementation. Enterprise architect count should

be determined according to EAC project size.

Depending on ther experiences on big EAC projects, the recruitment of project team should comprised of outsource adinhouse employees. Because of parallel adoption method andcoexistence system, conversion project can run step by step.During EAC, the numbers of divided projects that are already

runing may be increased or decreased according to next business process and tecnology implementation. Therefore, the numbers of conversion project members may changedynamically and the numbers become uncertain. Herebycompany should outsoce some part of project to manage this

uncertaint.

F) CoExistence ModelBecause of high rate of IT projects failure, companies

should prefer parallel adoption while implementing EAC projects. Parallel adoption leads companies to more agileduring conversion projects. For implementing paralleladoption, the company needs to develop coexistence model. Itis only way to implement coexistence model at data level forabsacting business processes. Coexistence model may besyncronous or asyncronous. If the old and new system is thesame database soware, synchronous would be used; otherwiseit would be asyncronous [13]. According to zer andGndebaha [13] Coexistence system can be prefeed as itonly adds just 2% performances overhead to the system. So itis possible to gain advantage with spending low system

resource to simpli EAC.

G) Agile MethodoloEAC project includes lots of divided IT projects. Ever

project includes business and tecnology goals and a team.Eciency and team management bring into ont. Agile

practices expert on this two items. Therefore, manager should use agile project management practices because of achievng target efciently in small projects. Jon D. Feandez andDaniel J. Feandez [12] explain set of agile project

management practices includng the following: simplicit, hug the changes, ish and focus on next job, incrementally

ISBN: 978-1-4673-5613-8©013 IEEE

change, maxmze value of ever task, gove with a goal,quer ever single task, fast feedback om all stakeholders,

high qualit output, deliverable, create documentation just togain value.

Consequently, because of huge amount of small projects,agile project management dominates the EAC project. Hence,company needs to lea and implement these agile practices

while developing new enterise architecture.

1) Focus On People, Not Technolo Or TechniquesUsing EAFs as a tool and high level of tecnology and

tecniques are necessar but not sucient factors for makingconversion projects a success. The key success factor,

however, is focusing on people (project team, customers, end users, executive boards) and human management as well as the balance between tecnology and business. Fred Brooks [14]states that the success of a project depends more on the qualitof the people on a project, and their organization and management than the tools coorates use or the tecnicalapproaches they take. So, a successl conversion projectshould drect its attention to the organization and managementof human resources. One shouldn't forget that EA model is

useless unless the project tea canot take advantage of it no matter how perfect it is.

Ambler [9] follows Fred Brooks' notion and claim that manager of EAC would realize that it needs to make ther workatactive to ther customers (soware developers, systemanalyst, business stakeholders, IT senior business executivesand end users) including their services. If customers perceive

that you have value to add, your enterprise architecture effors will aid them in their jobs. In , they are much more likely to work with you. If, on the other hand, they thik that you're wasting their time, they won't work with you. They'll nd ways to avoid you, to cancel or posone meetings with you.They want to avoid using your new system which is a bigchallenge for the success of projects.

What Brooks [14] and Ambler [9] have in common is that acompany should suppor the new EA system until it provesitsel It is ver important to build customer representative team

to support new EA. Customer representative team consists ofsenior business experts who are trained by project team on newEA and user interfaces. The nction of this team is infoing

the system users to solve the problems that occur in paallel rnof the system. The endusers believe that the new architectreis lly supported by management thaks to this representative

team.

2) The Building Blocks OfAgile Approach

Amber [9] points out that there are critical points in agileapproach which make it effective and superior to its rivalsFirst critical point in agile is the concept of simplicit. Oneshould keep enterprise architecture artifacts as simple as possible since it will increase the chances that audience will understand them. The project team will actually read them ad you will be able to keep them up to date over time. The idea is that a simple model that project teams actually use is morevaluable than detailed documents. So, each phase durngconversion should comprise sple steps.

384



The second signicant competence of agile is its beingiterative and incremental since it is easier to implement and

manage. In this way, ever level of coorate culture can understand this simplied implementation methodology. Whileconverting to new EA, company should execute projects step

by step to gain agilit.

Lastly, prototping and proving are pros of agile approach.That is, new EA contains new tecnology and new business

process design as well as the integration of these two criticalitems. New design needs to prove itself to build all EA on it.So, company must develop simple prototpe over a small

business scenario which encloses most common and core caseof all EA. If prototpe proves itself, project goes on this

prototpe but if not prototpe has to be redesigned. So,company is saved om spending much time to build wrongdesign and spending more human resource.

In line with Amber [9] we can add one more building blockfor agile approach. That is, the success of change management

relies on the right balance between business and tecnology.So, the approach should be business oriented tecnology whiledeveloping o new system and conversion manager ensures

that all stakeholders om the top executives to end users areequipped to maximize companies' new solution.

IV.EXPEMENTAL ESULTS

The proposed model has been used for a large scaledenterprise achitecte conversion project which stared in July2009 and is being expected to nish in 2013, in a bak which

has 300 branches in Turkey. In this project the whole ITinasuctures and computer application modules have been

renewed to adapt new tec nologies and convert to new business processes. With this new system, the bak has been a tecnology pioneer instead of being a tecnology follower.Besides, eighteen site visits have been taken place from well

known baks and enterises. These institutions have beeninformed about the proposed model and conversion projects

that are mentioned in this aricle.

The bak has been ansfoed into 3 tier applicationserver architecture om 2 tier in this conversion. A powerlenterprise architecture amework (EAF), which was donated

by standards and procedures, has been built to be used in lagescaled application development. Thaks to this EAF, asoware production line is foed so that an XTM soware

package which is comprised of 200 user interfaces 20 sub modules, a core baking application that has 2200 userinterfaces 120 sub modules and inteet baking application

with 287 user interfaces 18 sub modules were implemented.Conversion project has cost 68000 man day and 36 millionUSD in total.

During the project, a team of Enterprise Architects with the number of twelve has been available. Yet, the number of project team that has implemented the small dividend business projects, has varied between ve and eight depending on the number and the size of the ongoing projects. This particular team has been related to Enterise Architecture Deparment which is federated and lly authorized for the conversion project. Thaks to matured EAF, outsource and inhouseemployees can easily be assigned to ongoing business projects.

ISBN: 978-1-4673-5613-8©013 IEEE

A team has been constituted to support the modules which are produced and put into use so that the conversion can be easilyaccepted and involved by end users. That is, a user orientedapproach is adopted. An inservice training has been given to

the end users. Required training documents and videos have been prepared and deployed on the soware applications.

Along with the academic references given above, aquestionare has been conducted to IT Deparment of a bak

which has 300 branches in Tkey with the aim of veriing thesimplicit, dynamicit and practicalit of the proposed model.In this questionaire, two EACs, one of which has at least four

year experience with the budget of 60 million dollar has beencompared by thirt IT managers and eight enterise achitects.

The results showed that the proposed model has proved itsacceptabilit by showing the fact that while 76% of thesubjects stated that the acceptance hasn't been given easily by

the senior management in traditional approach, the situation is just the opposite in agile approach thaks to the prototpe model. Another advantage of the proposed model is its being a risk ee system which can be easily observed in the results of"The risk of the project being failed is highly probable and

"The success of the project termination is high questions foreach approach. Due to the paallel run and step by step moduledevelopment and deployment, agile approach is favored by thesubjects in the item: "The implementation of EAC withagile/traditional approach is easier. Lastly, 100% of thesubjects have stated that they will prefer agile approach over

traditional approach in prospective conversions.

TABLE I. Evaluation of Traditional (Bigbang) Approach

Traditional Defnitely Partly Don'tDefnitely

Approach AgreeAgree

Agree AgreeDontgree

Acceptance of11,76 64,71

senior management 5,88% 5,88%% %

11,76%

is easily takenThe risk of the

11,76project being failed 58,82% 29,4% 0,00% 0,00%is highly probable

%

The success of the17,65 47,06

project termination 0,00% 5,88% 29,41%is high

% %

The pleasure of the0,00% 0,00%

17,65 41,1841,18%

end user is high % %The outsource

0,00% 5,88%23,53 52,94

17,65%usage is easy % %Hybrid (PMI +Agile) approach has

41,18 35,29simplied the 5,88% 5,88%

% %11,76%

projectmanagement

The cost of EAC 11,76with traditional 3529% 470% 588% 000%approach is higher

%

The implementationof EAC with

0,00% 5,88%17,65 29,41

47,06%traditional approach % %IS easerI would keep on

41,18working with 0,00% 0,00% 5,88%

%52,94%

traditional approach

385



TABLE I. Evaluation of Agile Approach

Agile Defnitely Partly Don'tDefnitely

Agree Don'tApproach Agree Agree Agree

AgreeAcceptance ofsenior

17,65% 58,82% 17,65% 5,88% 0,00%management iseasily takenThe risk of theproject being 0,00% 11,76% 23,53% 58,82% 5,88%failed is highlyprobableThe success ofthe project

23,53% 70,59% 5,88% 0,00% 0,00%termination ishighThe pleasure ofthe end user is 23,53% 47,06% 23,53% 5,88% 0,00%highThe outsource

0,00% 58,82% 23,53% 17,65% 0,00%usage is easyHybrid (PMI +Agile) approachhas simplied 35,29% 29,4 1% 29,41% 17,65% 0,00%the projectmanagementThe cost ofEAC with agile

5,88% 5,88% 17,65% 47,06% 23,53%approach ishigherTheimplementationof EAC with 47,06% 52,94% 0,00% 0,00% 0,00%agile approachIS easerI would keep onwokng wth 70,59% 23,53% 5,88% 0,00% 0,00%agile approach

The only unexpected result for us is the fact that the cost of the agile approach is higher than the aditional approach. Prior to the svey, we expected the cost of traditional approachlesser due to the academic references. For detailedinvestigation, the cost of the two projects has been asked om

the company. The information has proved the subject'sanswers. We speculate that this may stem om the

management of large scale conversions' being dicult due to the continuous feedback which necessitates regularinteuptions.

V.CONCLUSON

The Enterprise Architecture conversion is a big challenge

for companies and organizations troughout the world. nTurkey for example there are big companies which arechallenged by these conversion processes. This stems om thecomplexity of the T inastructures, computer applicationsand inteal business processes. These companies try toconvert their EA via traditional project approaches. That is, the majorit of them use big bang approach in theirconversions which add to the complexity of the process as

well as maximizing the failure of adoption to the new system.n this study, however, a smple, iterative and customer

oriented approach is suggested for enterprise architecte

ISBN: 978-1-4673-5613-8©013 IEEE

conversn projects to eliminate or at least minimize thecomplexity as well as the risk factors. A questionare hasconducted. The items in the questionaire are related to thesecriteria in order to compare aditional big bang approach with proposed agile approach. The empirical also proved our thesis.The key elements of this approach like EA roadmap, usngenterprise architecture ameworks, hybrid project

management, agile methodology, organizational management,

business oriented approach, customer cenicit, paralleladoption and user experienced design are investigated andexplained in detail in an order.

EFEENCES

[] P. Weill, "MIT Center for Information Systems Research Presentation.Retrieved March , 2013 from http://cisr.mit.eduresearch/researchoverview/classic-topics/enterprise-architecture/, 2007.

[2] S. Philippidou, M. Karageorgiou, C. Tarantilis, E. Soderquist and G.Prastacos, "Meeting The Challenge of Technology-Driven ChangeWithin Institutional Context: The Greek Case in PublicAdministration, vol. 86, pp. 429-442, 2008.

[3] S. Palvia, E. Mallach. and P. Palvia , "Strategies For Converting FromOne IT Environment to nother" in Journal Of Systems Management,

vol. , pp. 42-47, 1991.[4] E. Mallach,"Information System Conversion in SMEs. in International

Journal Enterprise Information Systems, vol. 5, pp. 44-54, 2009.

[5] K. Eason, Information Technology and Orgisational Chge.Philadelphia, PA: Taylor and Francis Inc., 1988.

[6] O. Lee, "A Case Study of Nevada DMV system in Journal of theAcademy of Business d Economics, vol. 4, pp. 22-29, 2004.

[7] "62 percent of IT projects fail. Why?, Retrieved April March 1, 2013from http://news.cnet.co/8301-13505_3-9900455-16.html

[8] . Porter, "Managing Change in CIO Insight, vol. 9, pp. 24-25,September 20 1 1.

[9] S. Ambler. Agile nterprise rchitecture Retrieved May March ,2013 from http://www.agiledata.orgessays/enterpriserchitecture.html2011

[10] Project Management Institute, Proje Ynetimi Bilgi Birikimi Klavuzu

(PMBOK® L-Klavuzu). Drdnc Bas stanbul: Proje YnetimMeslei keleri Teknikleri ve Rotas Dernei, 2009.

[] M. Beedle, A. Bennehum, A. Cockburn, W. Cunningham, M. Fowler, J.Highsmith, A. Hunt, R. Jefies, J. Kern, M. Marick, R. Matin, K.Schwaber,. Sutherland d D. Thomas,"Agile Mifesto, RetrivedMarch , 2013 om http://www.agilemanifesto.orgiso/tr/principles.html

[12] OJ. Fernandez and J.D. Fernandez J.D., "Agile Project ManagementAgilism versus Traditional Approaches. in Joual of ComputerInformation Systems, vol. 49, pp. 10-17, 2009.

[13] M. Gndebahar & E. zer,"Kritik Finansal Sistemlerin Dn�UmSrelerinde E�ya�am (Coexistence) Yntemleri. in lusal YazlmMhendislii Sempozyumu Bildiriler Kitab, vol. 6, pp. 189-197, 2012.

[14] F. Brooks, The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Soware Engineering,nniversary Edition (2nd Edition). SA: Pearson Education, 1995.

386

Download - An Agile Approach for Converting Enterprise Architectures

Top Related